From: "'Roger Luethi'" <rl@hellgate.ch>
To: "Richard B. Johnson" <root@chaos.analogic.com>
Cc: Shing Chuang <ShingChuang@via.com.tw>,
Urban Widmark <urban@teststation.com>,
"Ivan G." <ivangurdiev@linuxfreemail.com>,
Jeff Garzik <jgarzik@mandrakesoft.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, AJ Jiang <AJJiang@via.com.tw>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] #2 VIA Rhine stalls: TxAbort handling
Date: Fri, 17 May 2002 02:16:54 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20020517001534.GA3632@k3.hellgate.ch> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20020516203159.GA10868@k3.hellgate.ch> <Pine.LNX.3.95.1020516165412.1477A-100000@chaos.analogic.com>
> I think one has to <somehow> find that the chip has halted besides
> the current way (noticing that it can't transmit anymore). I don't
There seems to be a misunderstanding. We already get an interrupt and a
status to indicate what kind of problem occured. Thanks to Shing's recent
posting we even have confirmed information about what events stop the Tx
engine. _Plus_ there is a bit flag TXON in a chip status register which
indicates whether the Tx engine is active.
So what's left as a (potential) problem? -- The code snippet that Shing
shared with us suggests that there is potential for a race between the chip
and an ISR which is already scavenging Tx buffers: the chip has updated the
buffer descriptors and set the interrupt status to reflect the error, but
is not yet done halting the Tx engine (if it had only failed to update the
TXON status bit, there would be no special handling required, since we are
writing that bit anyway in a next step, so the issue has to be that the
chip is in a transitional state and restarting the Tx engine at this point
would be premature). Of course this description assumes that the VIA coders
made that particular recent change in their driver for a reason.
> In the chip-halted work-around that everybody seems to use now,
> reprogram it from scratch. The last program operation being to remove
> loop-back. I don't even know if this chip can be set to loop-back,
> though, so the whole idea may be moot.
It can be set to loopback, but I'm not keen on having my chip reprogrammed
by every traffic burst (excessive collisions -> abort). Is that really the
fashion of the year now?
Roger
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2002-05-17 0:18 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2002-05-16 10:03 [PATCH] #2 VIA Rhine stalls: TxAbort handling Shing Chuang
2002-05-16 18:03 ` 'Roger Luethi'
2002-05-16 18:25 ` Richard B. Johnson
2002-05-16 20:31 ` 'Roger Luethi'
2002-05-16 16:39 ` Ivan G.
2002-05-17 2:54 ` [PATCH] #3 VIA Rhine stalls: Wait for the chip? 'Roger Luethi'
2002-05-16 21:05 ` [PATCH] #2 VIA Rhine stalls: TxAbort handling Richard B. Johnson
2002-05-17 0:16 ` 'Roger Luethi' [this message]
2002-05-17 12:51 ` Richard B. Johnson
2002-05-17 16:25 ` 'Roger Luethi'
[not found] <369B0912E1F5D511ACA5003048222B75A3C06E@EXCHANGE2>
[not found] ` <20020518040143.GA9318@k3.hellgate.ch>
2002-05-17 23:13 ` Ivan G.
2002-05-18 19:11 ` 'Roger Luethi'
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2002-05-17 18:46 Manfred Spraul
2002-05-17 19:56 ` 'Roger Luethi'
2002-05-18 10:08 ` David Woodhouse
2002-05-16 3:13 Roger Luethi
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20020517001534.GA3632@k3.hellgate.ch \
--to=rl@hellgate.ch \
--cc=AJJiang@via.com.tw \
--cc=ShingChuang@via.com.tw \
--cc=ivangurdiev@linuxfreemail.com \
--cc=jgarzik@mandrakesoft.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=root@chaos.analogic.com \
--cc=urban@teststation.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox